Tuesday, January 22, 2013

The Turkish government has recently embarked on an aggressive
campaign, pressuring a large number of European and American museums to
return antiquities that were taken out of the country during Ottoman
times.
While it is understandable that nations would want to recover ancient
relics that were part of their patrimony, in the Turkish case there are
certain anomalies that merit closer scrutiny.
If these valuable relics were taken out of Turkey in recent times
without proper authorization, one could argue that the Turkish
government is perhaps entitled to them, even though they emanate from
ancient civilizations that predate the conquest of that part of the
world by Ottoman Turks.
It is ironic that the country claiming these antiquities is one of
history’s biggest looters and pilferers of other nations’ cultural
heritage, such as churches, monasteries, monuments, and schools
belonging to Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks. One must have clean hands
before having the audacity to accuse others of theft.
Most shocking of all, the Turkish government is preparing a lawsuit
against the British Museum in the European Court of Human Rights based
on Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human
Rights, which states, “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the
peaceful enjoyment of his possessions.”
According to an article by Ceylan Yeginsu in the International
Business Times (IBT), using human rights laws to recover antiquities is a
novel concept never before used by any country. It is incredible that
one of the biggest violators of human rights in the world is getting
ready to sue the British Museum ostensibly for violating the rights of
Turkish citizens.
Turkey is planning to file this lawsuit on Jan. 30 to reclaim the
Mausoleum of Halicarnassus, “one of the Seven Wonders of the ancient
world.” The British Museum, however, argues that it had not
misappropriated this ancient relic. Olivia Rickman, the press and PR
manager of the museum, told IBT that the sculptures from the Mausoleum
of Halicarnassus in the museum’s collection were acquired in 1846, 1857,
and 1859. Rickman further states that “these pieces were acquired
during the course of two British initiatives, both with firmans [legal
permits issued by the Ottoman authorities] that granted permission for
the excavation of the site and removal of the material from the site
(1857 and 1859) and Bodrum Castle (1846) to the British Museum.”
IBT quoted Charlotte Woodhead, an expert in cultural heritage law at
the University of Warwick in England, stating that she was not aware of
human rights legislation ever being used before to reclaim such objects.
“If a claim is brought before the European Court of Human Rights, it
will be interesting to see on what basis it is argued and also to see
what the outcome is,” Woodhead stated.
Turkey has also used an Ottoman law banning the export of artifacts
in order to claim ownership of ancient artifacts from major museums
around the globe, such as the Louvre in Paris, the Getty in Los Angeles,
New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Cleveland Museum of Art, and
Harvard’s Dumbarton Oaks. If Turkey can claim Ottoman-era assets, then
it must be held responsible for Ottoman-era liabilities such as plunder,
territorial conquest, and genocide!
By filing such questionable lawsuits, Turkey’s real intent is to
intimidate foreign museums into returning the claimed artifacts. If the
museums do not cave in to Turkish pressure and refuse to turn over these
items, it would be interesting to see if the Turkish government would
still go ahead with its threatened lawsuits. The big risk for Turkey is
that if the courts reject its claims, no museum would ever agree to
return any of the demanded antiquities.
However, should a foreign museum wish to return an ancient relic to
Turkey, it should make it conditional on the Turkish government
officially identifying the true origin of the object, such as Hittite,
Roman, Greek, Armenian, or Assyrian. This is necessitated by the fact
that Turkey has omitted all references to the origin of ancient Armenian
churches and monuments from inscriptions presently affixed to the
entrance of these sites.
Turkish efforts to reclaim antiquities from the world’s great museums
provide a unique opportunity for Armenians to publicize Turkey’s misuse
and outright destruction of thousands of Armenian churches,
monasteries, schools, cemeteries, and castles.
Armenians should petition the European Court of Human Rights,
objecting to the return of any artifacts to Turkey, unless its
government makes a legally binding pledge to preserve and identify all
remaining Armenian monuments on its territory. The next step would be to
demand that Turkey return the more than 2,000 churches to the Armenian
Patriarchate of Istanbul.

No comments:

Post a Comment

About Me

Join Rafi Topalian as he discusses the past, present and future Armenian news, stories and related issues that effect not only the Armenian Community in the Capital District but non-Armenian readers alike.